Pipelined (dual executed) instruction collisions don't occur much because I already kept this in mind for the 060, however, I did also test using the extended (E) registers that the Apollo core has and that also didn't result in any difference in speed. Like I said before, if Gunnar has made optimizations since the mid-Silver series core then I could try testing some things again.

Is the V4 actually available? Is it any faster or have other features that don't exist on the Vampire 2 boards?

Please leave 080 registers, CPU will grow in MHz with FPGA space, and it might turn good later - to make a diff on higher CPU speeds.

V4 is pre-order and at-event avail in first small batch, more to come soon to Amiga dealers.

It has: https://wiki.apollo-accelerators.com/doku.php/vampire:vsa-v4:start

- Higher default and max CPU clock, FULL FPU - More CPU caches while 080-AMMX is same at tech level - 512MB DDR3 to max fast Apollo mem controller performance - 2 USB currently KB/Mouse only - Built in LAN - Built in DB9 for joysticks - More FPGA space for new feats :) - Dual Kickstart (total 1MB ROM)

Evolution of v2 more then revolution!

Gunnar von Boehn(Apollo Team Member)Posts 476518 Nov 2019 18:23

Don Adan wrote:

Strange for me movex.l version must be fastest, or this instruction works slowest than normal move.l.

MOVEX is as fast as it can be.Timing: (1 cycle/1 pipe) = 0.5 cycle

But saving a cycle in Endian Conversion is hardly visibleif the overall overhead to emulate a single instruction is high.

Vojin VidanovicPosts 169323 Nov 2019 09:03

Andy Hearn wrote:

and regarding PCx, would windows98 be classed as a "dos program"? :D

Yes. Windows ME is last one to boot from DOS and to include full DOS native support, but we dont speak about that one.

Best ones in ratio performance stability would be NT4 and 2000, since now we have ... i586 instructions and plenty of RAM. WinNT/Win2000 kernels are "real NT" used to this day and known under strange other names up to ten of something :-).

As usual, best things (Dirty DOS, NT kernel, LZX compression, Android phones ...) are not made by M$ but purchased out the house - with flight simulators, natural keyboard and mices their best products.

Win2k+Office 2003 is nice level of look, feel and stability and quite usable to this day with few add ons.

Win98 ... is same "trickery" as Windows 95. Old unstable kernel with new GUI and driver model and most of Win 3.x flaws hidden under the hood + new horrors :)

My thing is ReactOS. I would send a Vamp and PCx and ask for some Vamp edition with direct Vamp drivers kind of Fusion approach :)

My thing is ReactOS. I would send a Vamp and PCx and ask for some Vamp edition with direct Vamp drivers kind of Fusion approach :)

Do it! Send them one! :-)

Vojin VidanovicPosts 169323 Nov 2019 19:13

That is on team (Apollo) to decide, and ReactOS one. Also PCx improved is needed as layer in between. But would be great to see. In the end PCx and ReactOS could come with AmiKit XE+ or similar and offer e.g Libre Office older x86 and a bit older but usable Opera or similar. Dismisses the Rabbit Hole :)

We just need kind of JIT and code improvements, and as strong CPU or a bit closer to x86 (sacrilege!) as it can get FOR EMU PURPOSES WHILE PRESERVING ALL m68k FEATS. Gladly, FPGA approach taken enables this (v2 would be infant, v4 testbed, v6 or ASIC real thing).

Olaf SchoenweissPosts 64624 Nov 2019 09:56

you are generous with the money of others

Peter HeginbothamPosts 18424 Nov 2019 10:49

Vojin Vidanovic wrote:

That is on team (Apollo) to decide, and ReactOS one. Also PCx improved is needed as layer in between. But would be great to see. In the end PCx and ReactOS could come with AmiKit XE+ or similar and offer e.g Libre Office older x86 and a bit older but usable Opera or similar. Dismisses the Rabbit Hole :)

We just need kind of JIT and code improvements, and as strong CPU or a bit closer to x86 (sacrilege!) as it can get FOR EMU PURPOSES WHILE PRESERVING ALL m68k FEATS. Gladly, FPGA approach taken enables this (v2 would be infant, v4 testbed, v6 or ASIC real thing).

Why would I want to run legacy x86 OS on the amiga when there are so many options avaible in PC land.

Samuel DevulderPosts 24624 Nov 2019 11:02

Sorry for digressing, what about having optim for fast SSL decoding using AMMX extensions or even new extra magick opcodes? Decoding SSL in pure 680x0 is just... slow as hell.

my 2 cents...

Vojin VidanovicPosts 169324 Nov 2019 11:11

Olaf Schoenweiss wrote:

you are generous with the money of others

It Has a purpose. If I would live in a richer society, would be happy to sponsor 50 such crucial giveaways to existing Linux,Aros, MOS and os3 developers.

As well as to reactOS team. No such basic strategy is part of Amiga revival strategy.

Peter Heginbotham wrote:

Why would I want to run legacy x86 OS on the amiga when there are so many options avaible in PC land.

Why x86 sw? Extending library of software that can be ran on Amiga.

Live with using emulated, something that you don't or won't have native.

Also, first open source win32 os offers possibility of it's parts being less emulated and more m68k native

Peter HeginbothamPosts 18424 Nov 2019 11:57

again why would i wanted to run ReactOS on an amiga, Yes it would be cool but not pratical, i would just use VirtualBox (https://reactos.org/wiki/VirtualBox) and if i need to run an old application i could use CloudHouse or DosBox to run it on Windows 10.

I can see the an argument for an updated optimized mac emulator.

At the end of the day there are so many other priorties for the vampire, x86 is at the back of the queue.

Gunnar von Boehn(Apollo Team Member)Posts 476524 Nov 2019 12:07

Peter Heginbotham wrote:

At the end of the day there are so many other priorties for the vampire, x86 is at the back of the queue.

68K and x86 are very close to each other.In theory a real good ex86 emulator could reach great speed on 68k.

Vojin VidanovicPosts 169324 Nov 2019 14:22

Peter Heginbotham wrote:

again why would i wanted to run ReactOS on an amiga, Yes it would be cool but not pratical

Because you need light and modern x86 OS to reduce performance clutter on top of emulation layer. Only then you can expect apps to behave emulated.

And I am not aware of VBox on m68k. Goal of reactOS is to run natively on x86, not to have VBox penalty.

x86 emulator brings acccess to more s/w then MacOS m68k emu, even I do like what MacOS classic brings now. Its big and almost essential. So will x86 emu when we reach certain hights.

Later you take baby steps for it, longer voyage will take.

Just to remind everyone: At Amiga 1000 World Premiere A1000 was supplied with SideCAR XT to demonstrate ability to access MS-DOS library. It was done in lack of big Amiga titles at time - even DPaint Worhol used with sexy Debbie was in early beta and buggy.

Samuel DevulderPosts 24624 Nov 2019 15:22

Do you really mean running productivity applications on an emulated x86? Better run it in macos which do not require cpu emulation. Further more such application running correctly on a 486-class cpu are rare and completely outdated. Better support productivity applications for native amigaos/68k.

Vojin VidanovicPosts 169324 Nov 2019 16:02

Samuel Devulder wrote:

Do you really mean running productivity applications on an emulated x86? Better run it in macos which do not require cpu emulation. Further more such application running correctly on a 486-class cpu are rare and completely outdated. Better support productivity applications for native amigaos/68k.

m68k eco-system is a parallel thing, and because its growth will be slow and not predictable, its best to go for emu also. Majority of Coffin files are emus and emu files, be it arcade, scumm, mac apps etc. So we already do that, there might be room to improve.

Yes, it would be best to have ports by nicely done emu solves a lot a lot faster to some usable level until we have crucial ports. Its a gap filer, important one. If a success, it can be a crucial additional feature as selling point.

Now, we can run Win 3.x class apps / Deb 3 x86. If we could tune up PCx or similar we can use Win95/98 s/w / Deb 6 x86 Future foundation can bring us up to ReactOS and some modern XP Class apps / Deb 9 or 10.

So, no we cant compete to real world x86, but we can get some backdoor. Like SideCars and emulators always did for Amiga.

Gunnar von Boehn(Apollo Team Member)Posts 476525 Nov 2019 08:41

Samuel Devulder wrote:

Do you really mean running productivity applications on an emulated x86? Better run it in macos which do not require cpu emulation.

I'm not convinced that running applications makes that much sense.But with a good coded x86 emulation a speed comparable to 100MHz 486 is maybe reachable.

This would mean that many "classic retro" games like "DIABLO", "AGE of EMPIRE", "Star Craft", "Command and Conquer" ...will become able to run and fast and playable.

Vojin VidanovicPosts 169325 Nov 2019 08:52

Gunnar von Boehn wrote:

I'm not convinced that running applications makes that much sense. But with a good coded x86 emulation a speed comparable to 100MHz 486 is maybe reachable.

486 100Mhz 128mb+ can swiftly run Word 6.0 ;)Its not all in Descent and C&C

But yes, if late DOS and early Windows games can make it, why not. Civ under Win 3.x, Civ 2.x, Alpha Centaury are hights Civ AGA are yet to get to. Only Colonization is a gem of ECS.